Cats are (almost) liquid

no, it might lead to better surgery robots, search and rescue robots, and countless things that I'm not even capable of imagining.

you are the one comparing apples to oranges - the internet has been around for 50 years and has shown its value - this one has just been published!

What I'm trying to call out is that not all studies are equally valuable nor should they all be publicly funded. Would you at least agree me on that?

But how can you know ahead of time which studies are valuable and which are less so? What about metastudies? How do you quantify their worth?

public funds are allocated by multiple experts in various fields checking applications are in line with government policy. if you think you can do better, I'd encourage you to run for election and set different policies. from what I can see, the system is working as intended.

Those are great questions worthy of debate. But we shouldn't just give up on those hard questions and say that all research is worthy of public funding should we?

HN literally posted a video on how broken the public funding system is (in Physics) days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41808127

This broken system doesn't just stop at Physics. If you watch the video, she does a great job at explaining what exactly is broken.

I'd love you to watch that video and then come back and explain to me why she is wrong and why the system is actually working well and as-intended.

Eh. It's not like research funding is unlimited. Institutions get a budget and they spend it on research projects how they see fit.

I've seen the video - to be fair, theoretical physics is probably the cheapest thing to fund - they just need a supply of chalk. ultimately a lot of physics is a jobs program to keep physicists from going abroad and working on a foreign nuclear program.

seriously though, you should run for election on this platform!

> no, it might lead to better surgery robots, search and rescue robots,

No, that's extremely optimistic, at best. We've learned that cats seem to use their knowledge of their height but not width when choosing to go (or not) through a hole.

That's it. We're promised follow-up research because it might be that, other than height, they also know and use their additional characteristics, like weight.

That's all. Are you seriously suggesting this knowledge might be helpful in building "surgery robots"?

> and countless things that I'm not even capable of imagining.

Maybe. Are the chances of that enough to justify the expense? Couldn't this work be done more cost-effectively (it's about cats - the world is filled with guys who would do all the experiments for free, given instructions, just for their cat(s) to be in a scientific study...)? Especially since we're talking about Hungary, which is not a super-rich nation.

In any case, allocating funds for research is probably a very hard problem, and I know nothing about it. Still, questioning the expenses is something any taxpayer should be able to do. Just give me good reasons why it had to cost $120k to feed 30 cats for a few weeks, and I'll be happily on my way.

have you tried asking them? researchers are often happy to explain their work!

I'm not that interested - I'm not from Hungary, if for no other reason.

However, the guy who started this thread did. While I don't think the authors of this particular study are on HN, I'd bet we have some scientists here who could respond because they are working in a similar area and have some insider knowledge.

Unfortunately, such guys won't see the question because the post is flagged and dead. I even vouched for that post, yet someone came and decided to flag it again. I have no idea why - as I said, questioning the cost-efficiency of a study should be something anybody can do.

> I'm not that interested

You've put a lot of effort on here which could have been used to get the information from the horse's mouth.

What effort? I just wrote two short comments. I also have no idea where to even begin getting the info from the horse's mouth in this case. Just getting ahold of a proper communication channel would be 1-2 orders of magnitude more effort than my comments here...

EDIT: again, I'm not that interested in the cost of this particular study - what made me comment was the negative reaction of many commenters to a legitimate, in my opinion, question at the start of this thread. I can both believe the question is legitimate and not be very interested in its answer, right? That's how it is.

> ultimately a lot of physics is a jobs program to keep physicists from going abroad and working on a foreign nuclear program.

Wow. Uh, citation needed.